RSS
Perhaps, homosexuality results from the complex and unstable processes involved in the very nature of reproduction. Everyone is a combination of maleness and femaleness. Males just happen to be far more male than female, and females vice versa. But all males have some degree of femininity, and all females some degree of masculinity. In Eastern Mystic terms, there’s a bit of yin and yang in everyone. Even straight guys can find certain men attractive(though not enough to kiss and bugger up the arse), and straight girls can find other women attractive. Possibly, a straight guy forced to choose between humping a fat ugly woman and rolling in the hay with Tom Cruise might opt for the latter.
Let’s suppose homosexuality is the result of the unstable processes involved in the very nature of sexuality. Consider a product composed of a complicated combination of chemicals. Suppose the method involves many ‘tricks’ and could easily go wrong without proper procedures. Suppose the processes have been ‘perfected’ over the years but can never be foolproof. So, even though they work most of the time, it’s never all the time.
The rule of complexity is the more complicated something is, the higher the chances of something going wrong. It’s easy to build a thousand perfect toy bridges but not so real bridges of concrete and steel. It’s easy to set up ten dominoes without any falling but not so with a million dominoes. One can hardly go wrong with a recipe for mashed potatoes but not so with elaborate French or Chinese cuisines. Humans are complex full course meals, not simple dishes, meaning they have more chances of accumulating ‘bugs’ in their systems, especially as their separation from nature opened up many more social, cultural, and intellectual niches of complexity(and neuroticism).
Even a master chef who’d ‘perfected’ his skills over the years sometimes turns out a bad dish once in a while. Despite the exact same ingredients and instruments, the process could be disrupted by stress, distraction, anxiety, and etc.
Over 100,000s of years of evolution, the process of creating men and women has been ‘perfected’ among humans(preceded by 100s of millions of years of evolution that diverged organisms into male and female), but it could never be foolproof as the processes only grew in complexity. Consider the super-complex space program where, even after countless inspections to prevent accidents, something blows up in space or malfunctions on Mars.
The instability inherent in human sexuality could be due to the fact that all humans are the product of ‘opposite’ tendencies, i.e. all humans are the product of mixing of male and female genes(with the added factor that the male/female divide became more nuanced among humans relative to other species, such as the gorilla where the male is starkly much bigger and stronger than the female). Generally, the offspring is either male(or mostly male) or female(or mostly female), but the processes are so complex and unstable that they sometimes result in someone who is neither strictly male or female. So, you end up with men who feel like women and women who feel like men.
So perhaps, the main reason for homosexuality isn’t so much the genetic ingredients as the complex processes involved in the mixing of those ingredients(and may explain why even a hyper-male and hyper-female can sometimes produce a pansy boy child). Such mixing of unstable and ‘opposing’ elements, ‘maleness’ and ‘femaleness’, may not always go according to plan.
One thing for sure, even if the world were to be totally cleansed of all homos and their supposedly ‘gay genes’, homosexuals will emerge again from the simple fact that the complex process of sexual differentiation in reproductivity remains prone to errors and ‘accidents’.
Thus, homosexuality may be unlike other genetic characteristics. If we were to rid the planet of all blacks or all Asians, along with every last vestige of blackness or Asianness as recessive traits, there would indeed be no more black people or Asian people. But even if we were to eliminate all homos and their supposed ‘gay genes’, along with the recessive ‘gay genes’ in straight people, from the earth, homos will re-emerge because the super-complex processes involved in the mixing of man-genetics and woman-genetics will remain over-complicated, resulting in errors, or homosexuals.
Non-blacks don’t need to mix with blacks to produce life. White people can reproduce and continue as a race all on their own. Same with blacks or any other race or ethnic group. But, men cannot have sex with men and survive as a ‘race’ of men, and women cannot have sex with women and survive as a ‘race’ of women. Men must mix with women to produce life, which means all humans are the combination of man-ness and woman-ness.
Ideally from a biological viewpoint, the product of male-and-female sexual union should be a boy or a girl, but some boys tend to be girlish while some girls are boyish. The mixing of ‘opposite’ elements is always an unstable thing. Still, most effeminate boys grow up to be straight men, and most tomboys are straight girls.
Because homo guys prefer having ‘sex’(aka homo-fecal penetration) with other men, they’ve no chance of producing life as no baby is going to squeeze out of the anus, not even a female one.
So, it’s logical to ask how homosexuality could have survived through the eons of evolution when ‘gay sex’ never produced a single life. But, such questioning could be barking up the wrong tree. Homosexuality may actually be the defective byproduct of the complex and unstable processes inherent in straight sexuality that combines male genetic codes with female genetic codes, made even more complicated by the fact that even males have ‘feminine’ traits and females ‘male’ traits.
Another instability intrinsic to sexuality could be that maleness and femaleness may not really be opposites. If indeed opposites, opposites that attract one another. Before the division of life into male and female, life was asexual. Sexuality grew out of asexuality when asexual organisms split into ‘male’ and ‘female’. So, both maleness and femaleness are outgrowths of asexuality. Though asexual organisms split into male and female, the purpose wasn’t to go separate ways but to reunite to reproduce life more effectively.
It is the central paradox of life. Life separated into male and female in order to better facilitate replication by reuniting the male and female. Thus, maleness and femaleness split only to come together in a more powerful union. They are like magnetic opposites.
Among homosexuals, it’s as if maleness and femaleness co-exist in near-equal balance within the same person. A homo guy can be awfully ‘bitchy’ and fussy-wussy(and often has the narcissistic traits of womenfolk).
If homosexuality is the product of ‘gay genes’, one would expect certain groups to have a higher representation of homos due to socio-cultural reasons. But, the current science says the rates of homosexuality are more or less same across cultural groups. If homosexuality is purely genetic, there should paradoxically be more homos in repressively anti-homosexual cultures than in relatively permissive ones. Why? Because in a repressive social order that is highly anti-homosexual, homos are likely to remain in the closet, get married, and raise a family. Otherwise, the poor bugger might be stoned to death. Given the intensely anti-homo creed of the Jews and Muslims through the ages, there should be more homos in the Jewish and Arab communities.
In a social order that is relatively tolerant of sexual deviancy, homos could go off on their own and dilly-dally in their tootish ways. Among traditional Jews, homosexuality was a capital crime against God. An outed homosexual could have his head crushed by a rock or be forced into exile. So, there would have been intense pressure on traditional Jewish homos to remain in the closet, get married, and raise a family, i.e. conform to socio-sexual norms. Thus, more homo genes would have been passed down the Jewish bloodline. If indeed there is a higher percentage of tooters among Jews, it’s a strong argument for the genetic factor in homosexuality. However, if the rates of homosexuality are more or less the same among all groups, then homosexuality is more likely the product of complex reproductive processes going awry.
BLACK TRANNY TELLS TODDLER, “DADDY HAS A VAGINA”
Could there have been cultural reasons for the continuation of homosexuality? Perhaps, natural homosexuals, as opposed to the socially coerced macho-homos(or machomos) like the Spartans, tended to be less warlike and stay away from the battlefield. So, if lots of tough straight guys marched into battle and got killed, homo guys had a higher survival rate by staying close to home with the girls. As they were close to the ladies, maybe they humped some of them EVEN IF their sexual preference was for men. Since most men weren’t homo and refused to have ‘sex’ with tooters, the homo guys might have settled for women, or at least manlier women(like Michelle Obama). Or the homo guy could have closed his eyes while humping the woman and pretended her pooter is ‘his’ poop-chute.
Also, straight or not, many people eventually want children and something like family life. As homo men cannot have kids through homo-fecal-penetration, they would have to do with women to have a family. A homo guy might have ‘butt sex’ with other men for maximum pleasure, but he could still come home to his woman and children.
Indeed, a similar arrangement was not uncommon among aristocrats through the ages and across cultures. A nobleman would marry someone deemed appropriate but have mistresses on the side. So, just like men of privilege had both a respectable life with wife & children and a fun life with a mistress(or two or three), homo men could have played a similar game. Think of Laurence Olivier’s character in SPARTACUS who goes both ways.
Also, a disproportionate number of homos were likely to have been powerful and privileged, even in societies hostile to open homosexuality. Why? Because the rich and powerful appreciate fancy things. If the average sensibility of a straight guy is rather simple(beer and balls, the kind that don’t hurt to be kicked), the homo sensibility tends to be finer and subtler, like daybreak and twilight, which is more special than bright day or black night.
While most guys are simply masculine and most girls are simply feminine, homos tend to have that rarified blend of male aggression and female grace. It means homos have an advantage in certain areas of creativity. No wonder then that they were patronized and protected by the privileged classes that craved the finer things in life. Even conservative men want their wives’ dresses to be designed by some toot than by Big Boss Man. Consider all the famous homosexual artists who were favored and fawned upon by the privileged classes despite the prevailing sexual mores and prohibitions. With greater proximity to riches and power, successful homo men could have taken an aristocratic approach to sexuality. Have a wife and children at home while enjoying homo ‘mister-resses’ on the side. One wonders why English culture became so gay(in style), indeed way before ‘gay’ became synonymous with ‘homosexual’. Even straight men talked and walked like homos long before homosexuality was decriminalized.
Today, sexual politics is further complicated in the West because of the black factor. Without blacks, sexual politics among whites would neatly divide into white men and white women. White men would own masculinity, white women would own femininity. But this sexual dynamic seems to be breaking down as the black race, as a whole, is seen as more masculine than the white race. This means even black women may be seen as more ‘manly’ than white men, not least because many have primitive features, act like ‘sheboons’, and often holler up a storm. (On the Rolling Stones song, ‘Gimme Shelter’, the hollering Negress overwhelms Mick Jagger who’s left sounding like Peter Noone. Even the King of Rock n Roll Elvis Presley has to contend with hollering Negresses in ‘Suspicious Minds’. It’s like even a female gorilla can beat up a male human.)
If blackness is masculine while whiteness is feminine, it means even white guys(often called ‘faggoty-ass white boys’ by black guys) are left feeling wussy-and-pussy vis-a-vis the black race. In schools where black boys routinely intimidate, threaten, or beat up white boys who cower in fear, the result will be more jungle fever among white girls and more cuck-groveling among white boys.
It may explain the explosion of tranny craziness among white males who are being pussified at record rate. And look at the flower boys of Japan and K–gay-pop boys of South Korea. Under globalism, Asian males don’t win much at sports, and Asian femaleness has higher value than Asian maleness. It may explain why Asian males have adopted pussy-boy antics as their proper role in the global order. Sensing that Asian-femaleness is hipper than Asian-male-ness, even Asian males strive for feminine qualities. Globalism certainly further complicates the already very complex dynamics of sexuality.
Perhaps, globalism values globo-homo stuff as a safety-valve against angry male reaction to threats from the Other. After all, white men have traditionally reacted violently to black(or any nonwhite) threat to white sexual unity. Interracial relationships, especially between black men and white women, were banned in Old America. And white men lynched black men who raped white women and punished, socially or legally, white women who were into jungle fever. There was a time when white men were hostile to blacks in sports as black men had the potential to beat up whites and dominate the field as the new archetype of the American Male.
If white men were to cling only to masculine culture(as the only option for men), they’re likely to react to the black male threat as the destroyer of white male pride. They are more likely to fume with anger and explode into a Race War.
But, if white males are given the option of becoming trannies and other such gender-weird freaks(and are celebrated as such), they need not dwell on their butt-hurt white male pride and happily become girly men who no longer see black masculinity as a threat(as they’ve been ‘castrated’ of white male pride). This also seems to be the case with Asian soyboys. In the past, they have reacted angrily, even violently, to foreign men coming to use their women as whores or taking them as wives. Imperial Japan certainly wasn’t going to allow itself to be turned into a land of mamasans for American G.I.’s. But today, what with globo-homo all over Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore, the yellow boys are far less likely to react angrily to the Gaijin-Threat and just play at being the ‘other girls’ in whoopsy-doo fashion. Under globalism, one doesn’t have to be sexually homo to be ‘globo-homo’ or ‘metrosexual’ in style and demeanor. It’s all Ewwwwww if you ask me.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
This whole article is bunk, Homos are usually narcissists who were raped as children. Look up the writings of Dr. Charles W. Socarides and Dr. Irving Bieber if you want the truth about homosexuality. They were from the era before the APA removed the classification of homosexuality from the DSM.
Personally, I never liked homosexuals. But, the Trannies are even worse!
Either this Jung-Freud is a Jew or else a rather typical post-Christian WASP, which group is like the dwarves in Lewis’s Narnia, always sowing the seeds of ultimate perversion of the society because of their small-minded selfishness and delight in feeling superior.
The homosexual matter is not complicated if you accept and understand Origin Sin, the 1o Commandments, and Satan’s non serviam. All that rightly understood explains why homosexual activity waxes and wanes, and always is strongest and most obviously evil and predatory, in societies that clearly have fallen far from the path of Natural Law.
And Queerness is an old hand among WASPs. For themselves and to be used against others.
Uh… No.
That is the sort of question better answered by a science geek than a humanities wonk.
A scientist would observe that if there was a gene for being unconditionally homosexual it would have no future, therefore there is no such gene. A scientist would also observe that homosexual behaviour must have some utility or it could not possibly be so persistent. There are at least two sensible seeming options..
1) It could be a deconfliction mechanism. Our nearest relatives in the animal kingdom are harem animals (even some human cultures still have harems) Homosexual behaviour would reduce the amount of competition for females and reduce conflict amongst males.
2) It could be a population control mechanism. In overcrowded conditions, female rabbits can re-absorb their embryos, seals can freeze the development of their foetuses, overcrowded rats become aggressive and exhibit homosexual behaviour. Homosexual behaviour first became notable in cities, could this be the reason?
So a deconfliction mechanism, a population control mechanism or both?
Regardless of its actual biological origin, homosexual behaviour commonly emerges under certain conditions, confinement in single sex environments such as prisons, long sea voyages, single sex schools etc. It is also my personal impression that it is more common in urban settings.
So who cares? so long as people stay within the law, I am quite happy to live and let live.
.
This whole article is bunk!
Yeah! I concur, especially the argument about complexity because highly complex systems are NOT brittle, on the very contrary “causal degeneracy” (not the usual meaning of degeneracy) makes them very resilient.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.231499798
Agreed. The “child rape” argument doesn’t account for the continuation of homosexuality even in societies where it’s extremely oppressed.
As usual a very good rant, but again all over the place. Mother nature via the survival of the species does nothing for nothing. A small percentage of queers no matter how aberrant is no threat to the game. (of course the politics of the LGBTQ world is abhorrent.) I have always thought that mother nature allowed a minor percentage of queers to exist as a form of population control. But here is an interesting take from my favourite philosopher Schopenhauer, who wrote this around the early/mid 1800s. He hinted at the concept of the dirty old man….one who often turns to various forms of perversion as he ages. His specific point is that mother nature welcomes an old man going after younger guys because the species would be denigrated if these older men had kids with young women as is often the case as evidenced by feeble and weak offspring being born from much older men.
A last point about the Trannuy stuff. I have always been the last person to buy a new gadget. I resist anything new by nature..being a true conservative. Only recently have I developed the custom of objectively looking at new fads or things ( however repellent) and asking myself why are so many people doing this or interested in that. Why are so many of the now top music performers among people I hate and detest. But they sell. My very conservative friend told me about 2 years ago to go on to a porno site, which I seldom watch even with normal sexy stuff. He pointed out some of these she males who other than the male appendage looked quite amazing. I can see how some older men who are either bored with their wives or bitchy girlfriends or mistresses would try something naughty and forbidden like that to spice things up….and I now believe that it is happening all the time up in apartments all over the Western world. This stuff exists in other words because bored degenerate men want it to happen and mother nature says..no big deal.
Many look at homosexuality backwards. For example, this idea of the “gay gene” and why it hasn’t “died out”. In some Christian circles there is a tight association between gayness and bestiality. But look at the animal kingdom. Is homosexuality widespread among animals? No, humans are much gayer than animals. If we think about this in evolutionary terms, then we realize that for humans, homosexuality must provide some kind of advantage. And it is therefore becoming more, not less common. The gene isn’t dying out, it’s proliferating.
Let’s also dispense with the idea of homosexuality being unnatural. If so then why do you need the arbitrary power of law to prevent people from being gay with each other? That which is natural does NOT need to be enforced. It is the absence of homosexuality among humans that is unnatural.
The proof that homosexuality is both natural and genetically conserved among humans lies in our physiology. Aspects of our sex life distinguish us from other mammal species:
1) High rates of maternal death in childbirth. Without medical support, human females are much more likely to die in childbirth than mothers of other species. This may have to do with the relative size of the human brain and cranium. The human female body is not well adapted to childbirth.
2) Pleasurable sex. Most animals do not experience pleasure during sex. It is possible that sexual pleasure among humans is a direct counterbalance to the pain and risk of human childbirth. It is an extra incentive to get busy.
3) Huge dicks. Relatively speaking, humans are the best endowed animals on Earth. Again, this may be seen as an evolutionary response to the dangers of human childbirth.
4) Male g spot on the prostate. This one kind of cinches the argument. Male humans are physiologically constructed such that they can experience sexual pleasure by having their prostate simulated. The human dick and human asshole are actually adapted perfectly for each other. This could be another means of taking reproductive pressure off of women.
5) Male competition and socialization. Males of other mammal species tend to test each other with their horns. Humans only have one horn to joust with. Human homosexuality has its roots in domination. Ask yourself this seriously; if you lost in a fight, would you rather be killed or fucked? Only one option allows you to continue passing on your genes.
In conclusion, there are many aspects of human biology that suggest a role for homosexuality in the process of our evolution. It is a plain fact that any male can experience sexual pleasure from being fucked in the ass.
Now, does anyone actually want to fuck anyone else in the ass? I’m not entirely sure. Another uniquely human trait is our deep aversion to shit. Anal sex is both selected for and yet repressed by our other instincts. So I don’t blame anyone who judges gay sex harshly. It is easy to be repulsed by the thought.
I also don’t know why some men are completely gay, like me. Some only want to be dominated. They may just be a phenotypic extreme. Actually, in my case, I suspect that I am legitimately intersex, which is a related but distinct phenomenon. When I was younger I expected that I would some day meet some gay people that I had a lot in common with. But it never happened; I’ve never seemed to have much in common with anyone.
Sigmund Freud is a fraud.
There are no Blacks in rural America to compete with white boys.
Most Blacks live in big cities.
Putting the blame on Blacks is just plain lying.
There is no evolutionary stuff about homosexuality. It is cultural.
Many homosexuals have been molested as children.
The vice is passed down through perverted acts.
If you killed pedophiles instantly, it would not be a big problem. But you don’t.
There are tribes in Africa that don’t have a word for homosexuality.
It is unthinkable.
If Africa can contribute anything to the West, it would be by studying sexuality.
Matt Welsh did a documentary recently with Masai people asking them about all this woke stuff.
They were just laughing, they thought he was crazy.
Nah, if he isn’t a Jew he/she/it is a German papist. Jews and Germans are the two most degenerate races on the face of the earth.
Projection, pure projection.
It’s hard to take seriously much of what is being thrown against the wall by Jung-Freud. I’ve never read his/her essays before, but based upon his nom de plume I might guess that the entire essay was written tongue in cheek or maybe not. Were the theories of Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud terribly different? In any event it’s hard to tell whether Jung-Freud believes any of the pseudo-scientific hokum he offers. Hokum which is typically used by the left to both ignore the harm done by the behavior while raising it up to be protected/enshrined. Of course this homosexual behavior has been nothing but destructive and unhealthy—-heterosexual fornication behaviors are no better.
Why a particular human behavior exists over long periods of time has never gotten beyond this: Is is nature, nurture, a combination or something else? Jung-Freud doesn’t answer the question and so his article could be boiled down from 2500 words to the 25 words in the overlying sentence.
Consider two thought experiments:
What can we conclude, if anything? First off, the “blueprint” theory of DNA implied by Jung-Freud’s use of “gay gene” is known to be false. And so, the notion that homosexual behavior or heterosexual fornication is determined by our DNA is also false. The thought experiments above demonstrate that natural selection will extinguish small “founder populations” of those who follow such behaviors. And so they are sustained in the population at large for reasons other than natural selection.
The real question to be asked is, who gains from sustaining, encouraging and enshrining these harmful, destructive behaviors?
Homosexuality is about population pressure causing stress on the mothers.
Cities with many inhabitants should produce more homosexuals than sparsely populated areas.
Nature has mechanisms to control population growth, this is just one of them.
And when talking about stress, we should consider abused mothers, too.
L – Obnoxious women who can’t get a date, so they beat the system by hijacking vulnerable ladies.
G – Sissies.
B- Cheating wives with other cheating wives.
T – Seriously mentally ill.
Q – Every other weirdo.
A – Asexual (why are they included with these creeps)
+ – What?
No one’s arguing about brittleness. After all, homosexuality has been RESILIENT through the ages.
An elephant is a highly complex system, and it sure isn’t brittle. But the more complex a system is, it’s bound to be more error-prone. The errors don’t make it brittle but can set off peculiarities or mutations.
Even more than horses and donkeys and giraffes?
I think gorillas have smaller wieners because other gorillas will bite them off.
Really? I can’t image John Wayne asking Lee Marvin to bugger his ass for some amusement around the camp fire.
There may be another reason why homosexuality (at least in men) may be an evolutionary advantage as long as it stays at some low level. In a paleolithic, tribal environment, it is common for one village to wage raids and war against other villages. Imagine that once in a century conflict where almost all the men of one village go to attack another village and get themselves wiped out. The first village now has a huge surplus of women and almost no men. As long as the first village still has a few gay guys who stayed home with the women, the village still has a chance of recovery. Yes, the gay guys PREFER men, but with a dozen horny women wanting to get laid and get pregnant, the women can force the gays to service them. Just like your appendix is the emergency reservoir of bacteria to restart your intestinal flora, the few gay guys are the emergency semen supply if too many men get killed or go missing.
I’ve been making this point on Steve Sailer’s blog for years now. I know of one family with a late-life lesbian born during WWII. She was 14% of her generation, but produced over 20% of the next. Her gay nephew, born about a decade later, produced no children at all (unless he’s a sperm donor).
Gay lib may be eugenic!
what you are describing is known as the snu snu.
attached is a documentary explaining the snu snu ritual:
Video Link
Given that choice most men would prefer to be asexual.
AI can spot a homo by his facial features 85% of the time. Also, many homos have lisps.
Does being molested as a child turn your lips ‘gay’ and lend fruity expressions to your face?
Now, I do believe one can be ‘converted’ to homo stuff. We see it all over with explosion of various genders promoted by media and schools.
Still, there is clearly a difference between a natural toot and a converso toot.
Without conversionary pressures, the converso toots would be straight. But even minus such pressures(and even with anti-homo pressures), the natural toots will want to so bung-donging.
God is the the most viscous relentless comedian in the Universe. If you haven’t figured that out then you are likely lost for all eternity.
I approve of your naturalistic approach to the issue, evolutionary biology will apply. You make many interesting points, too many to address properly in one go. A few things observations..
You mentioned the dominance thing, in a lot of species (eg dogs) a losing male will present his rear as a signal of surrender (think “OK, you win, I’m your bitch”) The winner will typically indulge in perfunctory ritual mounting behaviour (just to make the point) and then lose interest.
I was once informed that a fair proportion of gay men aren’t interested in anal sex so don’t give up hope.
So why are you gay? (I don’t believe that you are intersex, your mentality is very male) Did you have older brothers? (deconfliction mechanism?) Did you grow up in an urban setting (Population control mechanism?) My take is that something in your environment triggered your ‘don’t compete for females gene’ and that is that. Sexuality is not a choice (“Next week I’m going to be attracted to tall, thin, Japanese women”) you get what you are given, or in some instances, what is inflicted on you when you are too young to understand. It has always struck me that a rational heterosexual male would approve of any reduction in competition for the available women.
Video Link
Nature will select whatever works.
There are no degenerate races but there are dumb people
who judge others by their genome.
@Priss Factor/Jeung Freud
White males are the least likely to be gay/tranny/bisexual. It is mostly Latinos, Blacks, and Asian males who do that, especially in the younger cohorts.
On the other hand, white women are more likely to be transsexual/lesbian than Asian or Latina women.
So you have it the other way around. In the West, Asian/Latina women essentially own femininity while white men are the most cis-normative. White women and black women are equally deiant from traditional norms, probably because they are both considered too masculine and phsyically unattractive to be real women.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/addiction-in-society/201210/are-minority-men-more-likely-be-gay-why
That’s impossible for men with high T loads. Boners must be appeased: choose not betwixt gay frolics and asexuality. If you’re currently sans woman stay home and masturbate to the mental picture of your favorite local media babe. The devil’s juice must be released to maintain a healthy prostate. Stay away from internet pornography for it has gotten ugly since the 1990s. Although if your love for Jesus prohibits you from self-pleasure turn on the computer and feast upon the hideous porno: it’s a sure-fire boner killer. Better than a dose of saltpeter.
Richard Nigma was a nerdy little creep hanging around Wayne Foundation Research Centre–spurned by Bruce Wayne –it forced him to turn into the Riddler —pink hair—green suit bedecked with black question marks —and those sun glasses !!!!
The Theosophists, who believed in reincarnation, thought that we must each experience the full variety of human life: it’s good for the soul. If you are rich this time around, then in a future incarnation you might be poor, etc. (To be clear: you are not being punished for your sins.) By their logic, sometimes we are reborn as a man, sometimes as a woman.
They suggested that a man whose next life was destined to be that of a woman would already now have some feminine traits – possibly sexual attraction to another man. (Mutatis mutandis lesbianism)
Unscientific(!), but their approach does have a certain “poetic” charm.
If homosexuality does not make sense given evolution… Then maybe the assumption of evolution is wrong.
Dear Tooth of a Corpse, aka High T-Loader :
I confess that I used “asexual” in an ignorant way since I naively believed it simply meant one who does not have sex with others.
After extensive research I learned that there 10 different kinds of asexuals,15 varieties of queers,18 categories of lesbians, 6 types of trannies and an infinite number of heterosexual practices.
To advance our knowledge I have taken on the job of pimping for a Professor of
Gender Studies and she-he-it-they is/are looking forward to meeting you for your first date.I need not caution you about your usual “I am the missionary and you are the native”routine.
Thank you for your service.
This article was obviously written by a woman not having a clue about male sexuality by assuming that a man would rather resort to homosexuality than having sex with an ugly woman. Most men wouldn’t bother with either and if needed would masterbate.
The best explanation for homosexuality I have seen is that modern humans are a domesticated species. We “self – domesticated” when our ancestors began to practise agriculture.
Some domestic animals such as sheep apparently can show same – sex attraction among male animals, while wild sheep show no such phenomenon. Apparently homosexuality is largely unknown among hunter – gatherer tribes – they are the “wild” version of humanity.
I’m not sure you are right about that, it may be true of you or I but a large proportion of men seem to have no standards at all.
>>So who cares? so long as people stay within the law, I am quite happy to live and let live.
You are literally the reason society has degenerated to its current state. Your abject refusal to maintain standards of civilization is an abomination against your sapience and a direct physical threat to the continued survival of human society. Faggots are the result of parasites which cause neurochemical changes to the brain. The disgust mechanism in your body exists to protect you from harm. Theirs is shut off, but yours fires rapidly when merely observing faggots and homosexual behavior. This is your brain telling you to get the fuck out of the area because a disease is there and it could be spread to you.
You, on the other hand, have consciously fought against your own self-preservation mechanisms and been brainwashed into accepting literal disease carriers spreading around your society. Do you even know what bugchasing is, you filthy libertarian whore? It’s what diseases do on a cellular level, but since the faggotry parasite causes neurochemical changes in people, it causes them to actively seek to spread disease vectors on a macro-scale. Similar to what cordyceps does to insects.
Toxoplasma gondii is the most likely candidate for the cause of faggotry in humans. Beyond T. gondii, there are other candidates for the theory of infection, and the most likely explanation for human homosexuality is that it is caused by some pathogen. It’s too common to be mutational pressure (and we don’t see syndromic versions, as we would in that case). It’s not new–identical twins are usually discordant (~75% of the time). It’s also, obviously, damaging to reproductive fitness. It’s certainly not adaptive–the “helpful gay uncle” notion, group selection, compensating advantage in females, etc. These range from impossible to statistically unlikely. And it doesn’t exist at all in hunter-gatherer societies. You have to explain what you’re even talking about when you ask them, because the idea of homosexuality doesn’t occur to them. The gay germ model leans on a couple of natural examples. One is narcolepsy.
Narcolepsy happens when a particular kind of neuron, concentrated in a tiny region in the hypothalamus, somehow gets “zapped”–damaged–and removed from normal function. 99% of narcolepsy cases happen in the 25% of the population that has a particular HLA type. This suggests that something, probably a virus, triggers an overenthusiastic immune response. This response “zaps” the neuron subpopulation which produces a particular neurotransmitter–hypocretin–that regulates appetite and sleep patterns. It doesn’t do anything else; narcoleptics aren’t stupid. You can compare narcolepsy to type 1 diabetes or Parkinson’s disease. Suppose there’s a neuron subpopulation that performs a key function in healthy sexual desire. Wipe out that subpopulation, and Bob’s your uncle. Well, your “lover.”
Live and let live? How about we kill all the faggots AND the people like you who enabled them to destroy society instead. Die and let die.
Yes, but such mutations are supposed to be “adaptations” to some changes in the environment and the question is not truly addressed: What is homosexuality “good for”?
The “degeneracy” paper deals exactly with this point, multiple degenerate possible causes for a feature (sexuality in this case) entail different responses to different environments.
I believe your intuition on this is off. The Asian boy bands play for Asian audiences. Asian girls in Asia like feminine men.
Not true, there is at least one report of homosexuality among a very primitive tribe the Guayakis, with plenty of explanations about the resulting social role:
https://books.google.fr/books?id=qZ7yDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT117&lpg=PT117&dq=krembegi&source=bl&ots=unde9OHUw0&sig=ACfU3U3txDKxGgtjBfqQFIJ5skIKeFE5nw&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiww-uZtcL9AhWPSaQEHfirDZoQ6AF6BAgQEAM#v=onepage&q=krembegi&f=false
Homosexuality exists because many gay men are married and have children and secret lives. I work with a lady whose husband of 30 years just left her for the best man at their wedding. She had 3 children by her soon to be ex-husband.
Fucking your one and only fanny is for child(ren) to come alive and nothing else. Marry Mary, multiply & be happy; family keeps on the straight line instead of strange lines. Mary A Dam m it.
Fucking is “to make” children; love in the flesh – love come alive. Children are “products” of love.
Porn makes poof(ter).
It starts oral, e.g. one wanting to tongue… suck tits…
More porn moves one literally down to the never healing wound.
Moreover porn it wants to possess and consume the whole female body (and what have you; yak).
Moreover porn it moves to more women; lust, greed … anger:
Here we go: Finally porn it to cocks… (on the anger with woman refusing being poof / sex object…)
Pornography creates sexuality and more pornography creates homosexuality and more porn…
Pornography is the root of homosexuality.
These postulated primitives are very progressive in their tolerance of homosexual men e.g. letting young men opt out of fighting and fooking when every body counts.
As I have stated before, we are in a Gender/Race War for the survival of the white human race.
GlobalHomo aka 2SLGBTQQIAPWXYZ+ – Two Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Beastiality, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, Asexual people, and Pedophiles. + added to cover the overlooked, are mental disorders being pushed as normal by the same sick individuals having these mental disorders. In order to prove they’re nor sick child molesting perverts, grooming kids for their own sick sexual pleasures, they now have out of the closet celebrities, big biz, government, banks, advocate for them by imposing forced draconian laws and mandates on global society.
They have this retarded psychosis that everyone’s a homo, that they’re just afraid to come out and admit it. They adopt kids to sexually abuse them, either physically or imaginary. Their warped sexual impulse allows them to lie and make excuses for their behavior, believing “it’s who they are”.
These are the anti-Christ, anti-civilization human parasites that will eventually destroy humanity by a state of transgenderism. These despicable subhuman creatures will evolve into hundreds of self identifying gender identities, each more perverted and degenerate than the other until they eventually battle each other for dominance over humanity.
As Scott Adams of Dilbert fame so eloquently stated with his “stay the hell away from black people”, white straight people should also stay the hell away from GlobalHomo, those who identify as 2SLGBTQQIAPWXYZ+.
This means he could get aroused by a female at least three times.
I’ve heard many times that true gays can’t do that.
Calhoun’s Mouse Utopia fits well wih this article.
By the 560th day, the population increase had ceased altogether as the mortality rate hovered at 100 percent. This marked the start of the “death phase” — aka the “die period” — in which the rodent utopia slid toward extinction.
Amidst the violence, hostility, and lack of mating, a younger generation of mice reached maturity, having never been exposed to examples of normal, healthy relations. With no concept of mating, parenting, or marking territory, this generation of mice spent all of their waking hours eating, drinking, and grooming themselves.
In reference to their perfected, unruffled appearances, Calhoun called these mice the “beautiful ones.” Living in seclusion from the other mice, they were spared the violence and conflict that waged in the crowded areas, yet made no social contributions.
According to Calhoun, the death phase consisted of two stages: the “first death” and “second death.” The former was characterized by the loss of purpose in life beyond mere existence — no desire to mate, raise young or establish a role within society. This first death was represented by the lackadaisical lives of the beautiful ones, whereas the second death was marked by the literal end of life and the extinction of the mouse utopia.
We are pretty much in the first death phase. The second death phase should around, oh, say, 2030?
Scientists have researched gayness in sheep, its a serious thing for farmers as they stand to lose if they don’t breed. They discovered a certain part of the brain is a different shape, who knows maybe the same in humans.
Also there is a strong link between trannies & autism.
Autism numbers have exploded in the last two decades now trannies are suddenly everywhere when you rarely heard about them before, more than a coincidence i think
If you ask me I’d bet its some environmental / household chemical exposure in pregnancy / childhood that’s causing the increase but don’t ever think they`ll not cover it up.
Thanks for your reply.
I grew up thinking I was straight, and wanting to be straight. What changed all that was puberty. I literally discovered my sexual orientation in a dream at age 11 or so. I dreamt about showing my friend how to masturbate.
After this I spent several years hoping my sexual orientation was a phase or that I was “bisexual”. But by 17 I felt the need to identify as gay, because I was not attracted to girls at all. “Liberal” propaganda helped give me the confidence to come out to my friends and family. But I never fit in with the “gay community” or found gay culture to be interesting or attractive. I’ve always tended to fall in love with my straight friends. Camp and makeup are so dull.
I am the eldest child and I have literally never been in a fight or been attacked in a serious manner so I don’t think deconfliction has anything to do with it. I did not grow up in the city. Likewise I have no memory of ever being abused or molested so I reject all these theories about the cycle of abuse. If we are going to insist on environmental exposure then the only hypothesis that seems plausible to me is exposure to plastics and frankenfoods.
I do think I’m intersex, since I don’t relate to straight or gay people. I also have an extra hole between my legs. Nothing you could even fit a pinky finger in. But it’s there.
Around age 18 I started smoking marijuana, and this drug affected me in profound ways. I literally feel like it forced me in touch with my feminine side, and forced me to deconstruct the masculine facade that I had learned from our culture. Spiritually, or personally, or however you slice it, I do identify as half female. I identify as androgynous and I feel this identity deeply. For this reason I have been sympathetic to the concepts of transgenderism. However, I do not support trans activism that targets children. If someone had asked me to irrevocably define my sexuality as a child, I would have chosen to be straight. In other words, I did not understand my sexuality at that age. I confused what I wanted with who I was. Even without the moral hazards of drug and surgical interventions, I do not think children should be asked to define their gender before they even hit puberty.
Being gay is not something I would actually recommend to anyone. It can be deeply dysfunctional. HOWEVER, there is nothing more liberating or fulfilling than being true to yourself. I am now at an age where I am becoming like a child again. My sexual interest is fading altogether. I still think males are the most beautiful and glorious creatures. Even as the physical urge disappears.
@tkk screeches, “Faggots are the result of parasites which cause neurochemical changes to the brain.”
That’s really dumb. You think gay people are any less averse to shit, for example, then straight people? Wrong. Gay people have no interest in shit at all. Anal sex happens in spite of the shit and not because of it.
What other species turn gay because of parasites? I’ll wait. You still haven’t addressed that the human body is adapted for anal sex. Walking upright, losing the tail, developing the ass. No other animal on Earth even has an ass. Why don’t you think about that for a while? Why do you feel the need to make mankind conform to the animal kingdom? The whole fucking point of mankind is that we are special and heavily distinguished from other animals. A little gayness is the price of your humanity. Take it or leave it. Fall off the ladder and rejoin the vermin if you find humanity so objectionable.
Sex is gross, even straight sex. Childrens’ attitude towards sex is accurate. The only thing that changes the aversion is hormones – not parasites. Straight people require hormones to motivate their sexual activity, just like gay people. Did you know there are actually male and female hormones in every human body? I would say hormonal imbalance is a much more likely cause of homosexual orientation than T. gondii. How many straight people become spontaneously gay later in life?
Why do you pontificate about something that you obviously know nothing about? Put up some references to support your thesis or else shut the fuck up. T. gondii affects over 20% of Americans. Are they all homosexuals?
“Jews and Germans are the two most degenerate races on the face of the earth.“
Lol, they are ethnic groups, not races. Do you relish being an idiot?
Knew a character who had 2 pre school children and a marvelous wife and later someone told me the guy had divorced the wife. I countered stating that he would Never find a woman as good as his first spouse but the converser stated ” NO- he left her for a —-man!” I was in shock but the converser stated I should watch Batman Forever and that cast -_Tommy Lee Jones as Two Face and Jim Carrey–perfect cast role of a nerd turning into a Twisted Riddler—perfect characterization of the dude we were discussing–
Such men are called bisexuals. Heterosexuals will hump any female type if suitably eroticised. Fat women historically have their own status as earth Goddesses and whores. Bisexuals which are all the great actors and musicians will slant towards aesthetically pleasing men if no such females are available. By thinking that, Yung -Freud has given himself away but is quite harmless.
So perhaps, the main reason for homosexuality isn’t so much the genetic ingredients as the complex processes involved in the mixing of those ingredients(and may explain why even a hyper-male and hyper-female can sometimes produce a pansy boy child). Such mixing of unstable and ‘opposing’ elements, ‘maleness’ and ‘femaleness’, may not always go according to plan.
This isn’t far from the best explanation I have seen which is that the gay gene is basically beneficial to women but becomes an error in men.
The theory is that the gene was selected because it makes women more attracted to men even if there is a gay male once in a while. So families with the gene are more likely get a highly sexual female that will reproduce even if there is an increased risk of a gay boy. When families normally had 4-5 kids you can see how the numbers would work out.
I have unfortunately had the experience of being around gays through a previous job and I don’t doubt at all that there is a genetic basis for most gay men. Before being around gays I was more open to the idea of it being a choice or that they had some attraction to women. The negative level of attraction they have to women was shocking. In fact it is common for gay men to assume that we straights are faking it because they don’t believe anyone can be that attracted to women. They really don’t get it.
I have read quite a bit about Christian therapies and most have very poor success rates. Even worse is that those gay men are encouraged to marry Christian women. The churches in fact attract gays that use Christian women as cover. They are actually more likely to have large families as it makes it easier for them to avoid sex with the wife.
You may be right. But leaving your wife of 30 years, three adult children and newborn grandchild ,who lives minutes away, to move 5 hours away to live with a man that you have had a close relationship with for most of your life is gay enough for me.
You mentioned the dominance thing, in a lot of species (eg dogs) a losing male will present his rear as a signal of surrender (think “OK, you win, I’m your bitch”) The winner will typically indulge in perfunctory ritual mounting behaviour (just to make the point) and then lose interest.
Yes and a huge difference is that they aren’t actually copulating and the male dogs still want to breed with females. Gay men are simply not attracted to women. Conservatives that are worried about society turning men gay should spend time around gays. Their indifference to women is mind blowing. Talking about women in a positive or sexual context will put them in a bad mood. It’s like talking about meat around vegetarians. They don’t understand why you had to ruin the conversation with such gross talk. It’s really unbelievable. Straight conservatives project commonality that doesn’t exist. Spend time around gays and you will conclude that they are hopeless. They don’t even understand how to fake attraction to women. It’s like expecting cats to like water. Good luck to anyone that wants to try.
So why are you gay? (I don’t believe that you are intersex, your mentality is very male) Did you have older brothers? (deconfliction mechanism?) Did you grow up in an urban setting (Population control mechanism?) My take is that something in your environment triggered your ‘don’t compete for females gene’ and that is that
The problem with the environment theory is that their siblings are always straight.
My wife knows a case like this and the reality is crushing. Completely straight and Christian parents, completely straight siblings, and one kid total fag at age 3. Yes at age 3 he wanted to play with girl stuff and all the time.
The parents of course are chastised and judged even though the daughter isn’t lesbian and the other boy is completely normal. Christians want to believe that everyone has a moral choice and it just isn’t that simple. Gay men can choose to not be promiscuous but I don’t believe for one second that they can choose to be gay or straight. Not gay men anyways. Lesbians however are more of a gray area.
What Accounts for the Continuation of Homosexuality? Why Hasn’t Evolution Weeded Out the ‘Gay Gene’?
Posit the answer is de-volution. The first is to ask what was, then what went on since, which, to begin, there were no homo cavemen. None. That’s how we were able to procreate, and evolve, up to a point, then per farming becoming easier, and the rise of the con schemers making ‘false money’ and ‘state’, people chose to become more feminized, assumed they could afford to focus on secs beside procreating, instead of on being fighters against bad tribes or cabals or their ‘state’. Then chemicals by the cons, food takeover, fueled by yet more ignorance. Focus on secs is selfish ignorance, unless you bred spawn to be fighters against the cons.
De-volution and selfishness is why homo focus continues, we stopped evolving when people got lazy and continued choosing to go along under con schemes.
Appreciate the article JF, important to think about.
.
Why does this random guy think he has the answer to homosexuality? Why did he not consult or look at any of the results of any sex researchers? There is a lot to learn from them. Why does he make things up and not define terms?
The lady I know is very difficult. I figured her husband is gay and I only met him once for several minutes. I haven’t known her for long, so I don’t know what they were like when they were younger, but she is the type that you would joke about turning her husband gay. Maybe he had an effect on her?
Ironically, both of their fathers were Methodist ministers. They now belong to some sort of flaky church that celebrates Jewish holidays (she got all upset recently because she couldn’t take Yom Kippur off!) and broke off from the mainstream Methodist church over its lack of support for gay marriage. She said the gay men in her church all supported her after the split, which is good, I guess. They probably saw it coming a mile away, if they hadn’t had a piece themselves. That has to be a helluva church, all full of homers and unsexed old church ladies!
I don’t think since publication of ‘All you ever wanted to know about sex but were too timid to ask’ in 1969 has there been a work of such quackery, old wives tales, and misinformation:
“How could homosexuality have survived when gay hiney hole sex never produced a single human life? (and you might have added that eons of lesbianistic licking and rubbing never produced human life either).
That is because homosexuals are the result of sexual reproduction; gays are made by straights.
It has nothing to do with genes. I believe male homosexuality is some kind of a congenital birth defect like a harelip or a clubfoot. In the case of gayness the individual is born either with some amount of gender dysphoria or without the natural revulsion to same sex attraction.
I truly admire your honesty
Everything makes sense when you consider the following :
i) Nature created homosexuality to divert the most defective genes out of the gene pool.
ii) White Trashionalists tend to be almost 100% male and absolute bottom of the barrel ne’er do wells. Yet the fat, bluehaired feminists are entirely white and equal in number to the White Trashionalists.
iii) There is an unusually high variance in white quality. Much more than in other races.
iv) Most White Trashionalists say that they would rather have sex with a white man ahead of a famously pretty mulatto/quatroon woman like 1970s Pam Grier or 1990s Halle Berry.
Ergo, the white race has a unique quarantine and filtration mechanism for unwanted genetic waste matter. The upper 90% of white people have no flaws, while all the flaws neatly concentrate into the bottom 10% for continuous, efficient removal from the gene pool. This is why the white race keeps improving, we have a special feature where the wastematter gets eliminated from the gene pool via a defective subrace that comprises the bottom 10% of whites.
The males of this defective subrace become the White Trashionalists, while the women become the fat bluehaired feminists. This is why there are no women in White Trashionalism, but fat bluehaired feminists are both equal in number and defective IQ/appearance to the male White Trashionalists.
This explanation is both robust and elegant, and really does explain everything.
Because this is The Unz Review, and for some reason those are Ron’s editorial standards. Not trying to insult Ron here: he has freely, openly, and repeatedly admitted that he publishes cranks who simply make things up as they go along.
I keep asking why but really, there can only be one answer. Ron Unz is a troll.
I have a few old classmates that are currently plying the psychology trade. They privately tell me that much more often than not homosexuality is associated with varying degrees of mental illness. I got the idea that homosexuality is not necessarily the mental illness per se. But rather that people that experience various types of mental illness find themselves going down the path of homo sex. So I suppose homosexuality is the symptom and not the disease.
Of course, not unlike autism, it is a spectrum. The trannies that want to mutilate themselves are crazy as shithouse rats. I mean think about a man that believes that in order to be happy what they need to do is cut their dick and balls off. Obviously self destructive mental illness.
And then there are the ones that got molested as kids and seem to permanently equate sexual pleasure with the type of sex that first made them cum. I suspect many of these constitute the common, garden variety fairies. Or the adolescent teen boy that their first sexual experience, for whatever reason, happened to be homosexual. Same thing. Most of them become gay.
And how do you make a bull dyke? Let a little girl get repeatedly molested by a man when they are on the wrong side of puberty. A certain percentage of them will become dykes and attempt to take on the role, and therefore the power, of the sex that molested them. Some of the others will become nymphos. Not gay but still fucked up and hypersexualized that puts them on a path that tends toward self destruction due to their high body count. Some of them will become “lipstick” dykes. Attractive females that swing both ways as opposed to the ugly bull dyke that just want to be the “man” in their relationship with another woman.
Homosexuality seems to frequently have a common thread of dysfunction, molestation, self destruction and mental illness associated with it. Of course that is simply my layman’s view of things that I concluded by talking to some of my old classmates that are more educated in psychology than myself. But I don’t think I am wrong.
Sulu
Your candor is appreciated and that seems to be the common sentiment of other
comments also.You may indeed be intersexual in that are you are not comfortable with your gay identity and consider all varieties of sexual intercourse to be”gross.”
I disagree with the standard definition of intersexual because it seems plausible that one need not have anatomical characteristics of both sexes to be intersexual.It may be totally a matter of identity and emotion in some cases.I worked in the behavioral health field for many years and knew a few people who fit that profile.
OK, you do seem to ne an unusual case, maybe you are intersex. I hope it works out for you, every deserves a chance to be happy with themselves.
We are increasingly being exposed to a wide variety of chemicals which can screw with your hormones so your hypothesis does have some face validity. I remember from decades ago cases of fish that were changing sex due to chemical pollutants, I doubt the waters have been cleaned up. With the plasticisers leaking out of plastics, estrogen mimicking isoflavones in plant based foods and the industrial pollution, it is hardly a wonder that our hormones are being affected. Maybe some cynical bastards decided that it would be cheaper to convince everyone that it was normal to be gender confused than to clean up the environment.
Maybe Ron Unz believes in free speech, if you don’t believe in free speech for people you disagree with, you don’t believe in free speech at all.
For example, Chile:
“In Chile, Sodano didn’t give the impression of being a churchman at all. He loved good food and power. I was struck by his misogyny, which contrasted with the fact that he was very effeminate. His way of shaking hands was very unusual: he didn’t shake your hand, he gave you a kind of feminine caress, like a nineteenth-century courtesan before she faints and demands smelling salts! Witnesses were also dumbfounded to see Sodano “bowing all the way to the floor” when he met the dictator . . . with his entourage, a pageant of male creatures, devoted to him body and soul.”
The dictator was, of course, General Pinochet, to whom Sodano’s attitude was “pragmatic,” to put it mildly. Just as John Paul dismissed rumors of homosexuality or pederasty as Communist propaganda, his nuncio did the same with all criticisms of Pinochet’s regime, to the point where the Holy See was one of few states maintaining diplomatic relations. In fact, Sodano arranged a “highly symbolic appearance of the pope and General Pinochet on the balcony at the Presidential Palace.”
Indeed, not for the first time, “Catholicism, fascism, and homosexuality produced a strange cocktail.” Martel speaks with Santiago Schuler, “a pro-Pinochet gay.”
“His gay restaurant, El Toro, tiny inside, but much larger when extended into the street on a terrace under an awning, represents the heart of Santiago’s gay life. And what a paradox! Chile’s emblematic LGBT venue is run by a fundamentalist ex-Catholic, an old personal friend of Pinochet’s! “Homosexuals weren’t very worried under Pinochet, even though the regime was indeed quite macho,” Santiago Schuler suggests. According to Schuler and other sources, Pinochet’s wife was both a practicing Catholic and gay-friendly. The Pinochets even surrounded themselves with a veritable court of Catholic homosexuals. The presidential couple liked to be seen with certain local gay figures, at parties and gala dinners, just as Pinochet liked to be seen with the nuncio Angelo Sodano.
“According to Óscar Contardo, Pablo Simonetti, and other experts, the dictatorship didn’t persecute homosexuals as such, in a special or specific way (like Castro’s regime in Cuba, the previous socialist government, led by Allende, wasn’t very gay-friendly either). What is strange, on the other hand, and to some extent startling, is the very existence of a real ‘gay court’ in Pinochet’s entourage.”
Sounds pretty good, but there were a few, um, problems, or at least one big one: Fernando Karadima.
“According to the 14 witnesses in the trial and the 50 or so complaints registered, the sexual abuse began in the late 1960s and continued until 2010. For 50 years, Karadima abused dozens of boys between the ages of 12 and 17, most of them white and blond.”
Yes, Fascism and Catholicism, the twin pillars in defense of traditional values. But after all the pompous verbal diarrhea, it’s squareheads down for the big boche gangbang. [Blackadder]
“The priest’s actions caused outrage throughout the 1980s and 1990s, but Pinochet’s gay entourage and the Chilean episcopacy protected Karadima and brushed the whole case under the carpet.
“The reasons that led Sodano (as well as Cardinal Errázuriz and Cardinal Bertone, who replaced Sodano as secretary of state in 2006) to protect this pedophile priest remain mysterious. Everything suggests that it was not just a matter of covering up for a priest accused of sexual abuse, but of a whole system in which the Church and Pinochet’s dictatorship were closely linked, and would have had a lot to lose if the priest had begun to talk. In any case, out of loyalty to the system, Sodano would always defend priests accused of sexual abuse, to preserve the institution, defend his friends, and perhaps also to protect himself.”
But wait. . . there’s more! Sodano — known among insiders as “Pinochette” — had some interesting members of the entourage, such as these two:
“An extravagant if closeted homosexual, Arancibia Clavel, was close to the dictator and the army, being responsible for operations involving the physical elimination of political opponents; [13] he received a heavy sentence for his crimes before being murdered by a “taxi boy.” [14] The second, Jaime Guzman, was one of the theorists of the Pinochet regime: this rigid ultra-Catholic law professor was named in a DINA portfolio under the label “homosexualismo,” according to Óscar Contardo in his book Raro, Una historia gay de Chile; he was murdered in 1991 by the far-left.”
https://counter-currents.com/2020/06/trad-queen-story-hour-part-ii-from-vatican-ii-to-john-paul-ii/
In Secret City: The Hidden History of Gay Washington,” James Kirchick documents how the Reagan administration was “the gayest in American history.” Nancy, like Mrs. Pinochet, just loved all those dress designers!
Reagan, Pinochet … what is it about “conservatives” all being gay? Hmmm?
Hey, coward. Would you mind replying to my comment and explaining why you believe I’m a troll? Perhaps with citations and sources, or at the very least some effort whatsoever? The slightest possible effort in articulating your own beliefs and why you think faggots deserve to live?
Thanks. I don’t expect you to actually have the balls to do this one simple thing, though.
You evidently spend lots of time thinking about male homosexuality.
Hey there, queer. You need to learn how to use real replies. It was only by chance that I even saw your reply. No one is going to know to whom you’re speaking when you invent random usernames that no one is using.
>> That’s really dumb.
Yes, it’s why faggots do it. It’s axiomatic.
>> You think gay people are any less averse to shit, for example, than straight people?
What I think doesn’t matter. We know it’s objectively true and has been studied and shown to be true. It’s a direct consequence of the parasitic infection.
;>Gay people have no interest in shit at all.
Wrong. T. gondii, for example, causes rats to become sexually attracted to cat urine. Is urine an intrinsically sexual object? No. Is a sphincter an intrinsically sexual object? No. One study reports 70% of homosexuals admitting to having relations only one time with over 50% of their partners. The average homosexual has between 20 and 106 partners per year. Of homosexuals questioned, 43% admitted to 500 or more partners in a lifetime, 28% admitted to 1000 or more in a lifetime. 25% of gay men in America have had over 1000 sex partners. 10-15% of older homosexuals have more than 1000 sex partners. In Australia, 25% of homosexuals have had more than 100 sex partners. 43% of gay men have over 500 partners. Of these people, 79% said that half of those partners were total strangers, and 70% of those sexual contacts were one night stands (or, as one homosexual admits in the film “The Castro,” one minute stands). The average heterosexual has only 8 partners in a lifetime, even after the sexual revolution’s damage. Homosexual encounters occur statistically often while drunk, high on drugs, or in an orgy setting. 41% of homosexuals say they have had encounters with strangers in public restrooms, 60% say they have had met strangers in bathhouses, and 64% of these encounters have involved the use of illegal drugs.
Many homosexuals don’t heed the warnings of their lifestyle: “Knowledge of health guidelines was quite high, but this knowledge had no relation to sexual behavior.” Homosexuals got homosexuality removed from the list of mental illnesses in the early 1970s by attacking the annual American Psychiatric Association conference on successive years. “Guerrilla theater tactics and more straightforward shouting matches characterized their presence.” In the decades since homosexuality has been removed from the APA list of mental illnesses, so has pedophilia (except when the adult feels “subjective distress”). 37% of homosexuals engage in sadomasochism, which accounts for many accidental deaths. In San Francisco, classes were held to teach homosexuals how to not kill their partners during sadomasochism. Gay men are six times more likely to commit suicide than straight men. Gay men are 12 times more likely to use amphetamines than straight men. Gay men are 10x more likely to use heroin than straight men. Gay people are 2-3 times more likely to abuse alcohol than straight people. 79% of homosexual men say over half of their sex partners are strangers.
In the aforementioned study, the average homosexual fellated somewhere between 20 and 106 men, swallowed 50 seminal discharges, had 72 penile penetrations of the anus, and ingested feces of 23 different men each year. The study reports that 90% of homosexuals have engaged in anal penetration, and 66% engage regularly.
Gee, I wonder what T. gondii does to human neuropsychology…
>>What other species turn gay because of parasites? I’ll wait.
You were literally already told, dipshit.
>>You still haven’t addressed that the human body is adapted for anal sex
It literally isn’t. You’re just mentally defective and are a walking (cheeks clenched, because of the colostomy bag) stereotype that is addressed in the study quote above. “Aware of the risks but ignores them.” Enjoy your distended sphincter.
>>No other animal on Earth even has an ass.
This is how retarded queers actually are. This is what they actually think we’ll believe.
>> Why don’t you think about that for a while?
I’m not a sodomite, so I don’t spend my time thinking about sodomy like you do.
>> Why do you feel the need to make mankind conform to the animal kingdom?
Said the homosexual, trying to justify his objectively and universally unhealthy behavior by citing the animal kingdom. Go on, subhuman. Tell us that bestiality and incest are good because animals do it. Say the fucking line. Read from the script. I know all your tricks.
>>The whole fucking point of mankind is that we are special and heavily distinguished from other animals.
And thus don’t do what animals do, like be faggots.
>>A little gayness is the price of your humanity.
Nah, exact opposite of reality. Faggot hatred is genetic (cited below). Only brainwashing and chemical torture can change this innate feeling.
>> Take it or leave it.
I’m leaving it, yeah. It’s subsapient, animalistic behavior. Faggots need to be exterminated and we need a cure for T. gondii.
>>Fall off the ladder and rejoin the vermin if you find humanity so objectionable.
Said the advocate for sodomy, without a shred of irony.
>>Sex is gross, even straight sex.
Look at the queer, ladies and gents.
>>I would say hormonal imbalance is a much more likely cause of homosexual orientation than T. gondii.
Which causes hormonal imbalance, dumbass.
>>How many straight people become spontaneously gay later in life?
None, by the definition of the word.
>>Why do you pontificate about something that you obviously know nothing about?
Oof, how humiliating for you.
>> Put up some references to support your thesis or else shut the fuck up.
Citations, by the way. This isn’t the best site on which to be able to post them inline. Enjoy being objectively wrong, disease-riddled filth. Now shut the fuck up, coward.
* https://archive.is/f9Twu
* https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0023277
* https://archive.is/Q5mNA
* https://archive.is/oR8eV
* https://archive.md/2AGMA
* https://archive.is/A2UOS
* https://archive.md/q53LX
* http://web.archive.org/web/20190528045852/https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM198002213020804
* https://archive.md/pCbTh
* https://archive.md/0G1Xa
* https://archive.md/TYPwX
* https://archive.md/koSPO
* https://archive.fo/wPLKx
* https://archive.is/9jsIR
When you’re physically capable of holding a discussion without a logical fallacy, let us know, okay sodomite? Until then, just fuck off back to Reddit or wherever else your antidiscourse is standard practice. This is middle school bullshit; it should be humiliating to your coworkers.
Anal sex is clearly a natural option. Humans like other primates are designed (if you will) to copulate a tergo (from behind), and so the “wrong hole” (as the abused wife in Last Exit to Brooklyn, not to be confused with Last Tango in Parishollers out) will occasionally come into play.
“Love has pitched his tent/in the place of excrement” — W. B. Yeats, hero of the right wing.
At some point humans began copulating face to face — the so-called “missionary position” as the natives called it, after spying on the reverend and his wife. Desmond Morris (The Naked Ape) speculated that this is why human females evolved firm, pert breasts, rather than the saggy baboon titties of National Geographic, to replace the signal provided by the buttocks. Negroes seem to be stuck at the buttock phase — hence, “twerking.”
My anecdotal evidence, from the homos I spoke with in NYC in the 90s, is that anal sex is not a favorite — I recall occasions when someone announced “I have anal last night for the first time, why didn’t someone tell me about the after-effects!”
I think the idea of homos as butt pirates is pure projection. Straight men try to imagine gay sex, and can only think of putting the penis somewhere. It’s straight men who love anal — just ask the prostitutes that they pay extra for it. They beg it from their wives and girlfriends, and sometimes get it as a birthday present. I hope they’re happy with it.
If it is more prevalent among homos today, I suspect it’s a reverse phenom, like marriage and adoption. It’s become “assumed” they want it, so they feel they have to play along.
And how do you make a bull dyke? Let a little girl get repeatedly molested by a man when they are on the wrong side of puberty.
So you are going to blame all bull dykes on men?
If molestation caused lesbianism then you would see far more variation.
Unless you want to argue that child molesters like large and boyish looking girls.
Bull dykes are most likely dating rejects.
Homosexuality in men is most likely a gene mutation.
Oops you’re right I called you @TKK, my bad, that guy is much cooler than you.
Thanks for the word salad and the link soup but all I asked for was a citation supporting a link between T. Gondii and homosexuality. Where is it? You said the parasite makes rats attracted to cat urine, which everybody already knows. You seem to think this is already proof that it makes humans gay. Okay…don’t women produce urine and feces as well? Why aren’t gay men interested in that? The whole point of T. Gondii in rats and cats is that it completes the parasites’ life cycle. It cannot do the same in a human body, so why would it even affect human bodies in the same way?
Even you are trying to explain why people are born gay, since you dismiss the possibility of becoming spontaneously gay later in life. So your theory must be that T. Gondii infects mothers who pass on behavioral changes to their sons. It seems to me that you are twisting yourself into a pretzel by insisting that gayness can only be a disease and not a natural variation. Bare assumptions and unrelated links are not enough to support your thesis. Show me the evidence.
If you think gay men are attracted to shit then you really don’t understand anything. Gay men are attracted to dicks. All gays want dick first and foremost. You don’t even know what gay people are. Tilting at windmills…
You also claimed that “animals be faggots”. OK then, which other animals engage in anal sex?
I think the idea of homos as butt pirates is pure projection.
It’s not projecting when the HIV epidemic was spread primary through anal sex.
Monkeypox aka Buttpox could have easily mutated and turned into another epidemic. Gay men are a threat to public health because they insist upon having anal sex with multiple partners. It’s an extremely high risk form of sex. The anus is not designed for sex and much more likely to tear and bleed. Combine that with random partners and you get an STD outbreak. Gay men are responsible for the spread of numerous STDs and not just HIV.
Straight men try to imagine gay sex, and can only think of putting the penis somewhere. It’s straight men who love anal — just ask the prostitutes that they pay extra for it.
Well that actually sounds like projection. I’m sure prostitutes charge for all kinds of things that are outside the norm.
If it is more prevalent among homos today, I suspect it’s a reverse phenom, like marriage and adoption. It’s become “assumed” they want it, so they feel they have to play along.
The original buttpox outbreak came from a massive orgy that included anal sex. In fact gays couldn’t give anal sex a break for 2 months. It would have gone away if they avoided gay sex or maintained one partner.
https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-health-and-wellness/monkeypox-driven-overwhelmingly-sex-men-major-study-finds-rcna39564
Research consistently indicates that homosexuality is the result of interacting environmental and genetic factors. The environmental factors are larger, but in almost all studies the genetic factor is not small either.
I just wish the scientists would also research paedophilia and zoophilia. I am sure they would find a genetic factor for them as well. All three of these behaviors are already linked statistically to elevated rates of “non-right” handedness and minor physical anomalies. Because low childhood mortality from sanitary science, vaccines, and antibiotics is allowing gene level mutations that affect both body and mind to accumulate, we can expect growing numbers of persons to be affected by these and other problems.
We need either a return to far higher childhood mortality rates, or we need an effective eugenics program. Otherwise, our social problems will continue to worsen.
Pinochet was not a Fascist. He was a Chicago School “free marketeer” and an admirer of Milton Friedman.
Maybe there’s no such thing as a ‘gay gene’. Has anyone thought of that. That it’s all due to environmental factors and that the only changes to human genes involved in homosexuality are epigenetic and probably caused by exposure in utero to pollutants and hormone-disrupters. That is, it is all congenital rather than genetic.
“It has nothing to do with genes. I believe male homosexuality is some kind of a congenital birth defect like a harelip or a clubfoot.”
The heritability of clubfoot is 0.60 or 60% (=60% of the variance in the trait is due to genes). Heritability of “hair lip” is 70%. Heritability of homosexuality is less than 50%, but still substantial. Genetic defects make one vulnerable or more vulnerable to environmental influences.
In surveys, most homosexuals report that they have had relations with the opposite sex as well. They are far less likely than heterosexuals to target one type of sexual partner exclusively.
Historically, it is likely that many homosexual men and more homosexual women have married and reproduced due to social expectations. Also, some people are sexually variable. In 1994, a very carefully done study, which actually found results that were more conservative than previous sex surveys that were rather sloppy about their sampling procedures, found that 6% of each sex, or 1 self identified HETEROSEXUAL out of every 19, said that they believed they would find a homosexual encounter enjoyable. It is easy to see how these factors could keep susceptibility to homosexuality in the gene pool at a low level. Only the most severely affected are likely to weed themselves completely from the gene pool, but even in their cases they are likely to have reproducing relatives who share many of the same genes.
For some reason, sheep have a lot of homosexual rams. Some years ago, a report hit the popular media that some researcher had bred a strain of exclusively homosexual sheep, an utterly useless and not naturally sustainable endeavor except to score a political point. But in theory, the opposite should also be possible. In practice, it is hard to regulate the breeding of humans, and perhaps even harder to identify the closeted homosexuals or the numerous (at least 6%) heterosexuals who have the ability to “go the other way” without much difficulty.
If human societies could take control of their own breeding, we could eliminate a lot of our individual and collective problems. However, that would probably require that our societies evolve further in the direction of eusocial species such as ants, bees, termites, and the naked mole rat which is currently the most eusocial mammal. Some biologists argue we have already developed quite far in that direction. The main eusocial characteristic that we continue to lack is controlled differential fertility, that is, a primate counterpart to the queen breeders found in fully eusocial species.
By the way, both Hutterites and early LDS Mormons symbolized their societies as bee colonies. That is why the beehive is a symbol of Utah. The Bible says, “Go to the ant, thou sluggard. Consider her ways and be wise.” I suppose bees will do just as well. Mainstream Americans loathe the idea of modeling themselves on a colony of ants, and science fiction has trained us to dread that sort of social order (think of “The Borg” in the Star Trek series), but it appears to be the most logical way forward for our species.
Homos are not “feminine”. Imagine describing a pederast as “motherly” or “nurturing” lmao. I wouldn’t tolerate a woman who acted anything like your typical sodomite. Homos are just perverts, there is no more “gene” required for sodomitical perversion than one is necessary for being a foot fetishist or a more general coprophile (rather than just one that specializes in male-only feces).
Yawn.
I suppose the fundamentalist bigots at the CDC just make up the hepatitis prevalence rates in MSM to slander them.
Autism numbers went up at the same time that mental retardation numbers went down. A Swedish study found that when you use criteria that are consistent over time, autism had not really increased. Dull kids are just getting reclassified. Less stigma and more programs to help the autistic.
Evolution doesn’t have to be perfect, just good enough to get a critical mass of us into grandparenthood. Myopia shouldn’t have survived the Ice Age but it did.
Homosexuality is too rare to be an evolved response to anything; it’s a pathology like schizophrenia, pediatric cancer, or type 1 diabetes. It’s only amplified into social contagion at this point because of strenuous efforts by Megaphone-holders, themselves only around because of technological advances enabling the practical abolition of scarcity. 95+% of people remain viscerally repulsed by the thought of someone of their own sex being physically intimate with them.
There is no such thing as a gay gene and there is no such thing as evolution.
Read gay troll’s comments on this thread, he’s old school and what he says is interesting. The most misogynistic rant I’ve heard in my life was from a male homosexual. So over-the-top that it was entertaining.
Some portion are natural, as seems to be the case with gay troll. OTOH, other portions are due to early molestation by older men or female, usually maternal, influence. The closest friend I ever had of that persuasion told me that he was that way because of bad behaviour by his mother. He never went into the details, so I don’t know exactly what he meant.
This is also true of female homosexuals. The writer of The Vagina Monologues, (((Eve Einsler))), boasted of having molested a twelve-year-old girl in the original edition of her “work”. She later changed the age to sixteen.
(((Lena Dunham))) also boasts of having fiddled with her (now homosexual) younger sister’s private parts in her autobiography.
Not that I have read either of those two in full.
Again, a few are naturals, and I had a good friend who seemed so.
Another factor, seems more so with men, is the thrill of erotic terror. More and more perverse things, more thrills. Of course, the Jewish-directed flood of porn pushes things that way.
That very young children are being indoctrinated to be homosexual or tranny in most western countries is a new factor. Obviously, this is making a difference.
By the way, I 100% agree that there is no such thing as a gay gene. It was just a fiction invented by stupid ideologues years ago. No evidence for it at all, despite years of trying.
However, a few will be so regardless of social pressure and for some biological or neurological reason, or a combination.
Really, who cares?
hey douchebag, i’d love to respond to your idiotic comment, as i had thought your were just trolling but apparently you are an actual idiot, so i apologize for calling you a troll. as to why i don’t want to senselessly murder “faggots” for being “faggots”, it is the same reason i don’t want to senselessly murder you for being an idiot. i just don’t get off on murdering people, like you claim to. interesting that you use the term faggots, first ascribed to them when they were using bundles of sticks to burn them to death. you sound a lot like the ukranazis that burned people alive in odessa, maybe you should take your “skills” to ukraine, if your not already there.
There is no such thing as a “homosexual gene”.
That being said, homosexuality is a result of “grooming” in all cases.
Not only outsiders, but some parents unwittingly groom their children into the homosexual “lifestyle”.
Some parents, especially those without a “man in the house” think that it is “cute” to dress their little boys in girls clothing. Some children pick up on this and think that it is OK to ignore their own sexual makeup, setting them up to be more receptive to “grooming” by adult homosexuals.
Grooming is effective in children as their sexual mores are not yet “set in stone” and as such, manipulation by adult groomers is successful introducing them to the homosexual “lifestyle”, ruining them for life.
Homosexual “grooming” is actually pedophilia in action and is criminal in all 50 states.
Ever wonder why homosexual conversion therapy programs have been made “illegal” in certain pro-homosexual states?
Because they WORK to reorient homosexuals into accepting and embracing their proper sexual role. Conversion therapy programs get rid of the “grooming” brainwashing that was imposed on them at an early age.
Former San Francisco “mayor” Harvey Milk bragged about “getting them while they’re young” and was himself a homosexual pedophile.
It seems that homosexuality can be both genetic and circumstantially induced. The common thread is that the homosexual usually has unwanted genes that nature does not want to propagate.
As we can see from multiple instances, various WNs, when faced with the simple question of whether they thought it would be worse for them to have sex with a white man or the prettiest quatroon/mulatto (such as a 1970s Pam Grier or a 1990s Halle Berry), many either said they would choose the man, or refused to answer the question even after it was posed a second, third, or fourth time to them. This is a situation where no answer clearly IS an answer.
Remember that a regular heterosexual man (white or otherwise) would have no hesitation in making it super clear that he prefers a 1990s Halle Berry (or equivalent famously pretty mulatto/quatroon) over a man (of any race) as a sexual partner.
Their rationale is that race loyalty has to trump sexual orientation, and that producing no baby is better than producing a quatroon or octoroon baby. At least they are able to spell out their logic.
The full list of commenters here who either outright said they prefer the man, or would not say that they prefer the prettiest quatroon woman in the world over a man, is as follows :
JohnnySmoggins
GeneralRimmer
utu
AndrewR
Svigor
Mike Tre (aka MikeatMikedotMike)
Hangnail Hans
Twodees Partain
BenKenobi
neutral
iffen
William Badwhite
Porktastic
Polistra
Pericles
Lurker
Cowtown Rebel
ATBOTL
Trinity
JMcG
kihowi
Remember that any of these individuals can get removed from this list at any time if they simply say that having sex with a 1990s Halle Berry (or equivalent very pretty quatroon/mulatto) is much better than having sex with a white man.
Truth, Rosie, Mrs. Alden, Audacious Epigone, and Anatoly Karlin will all vouch for having seen members of this list behaving as described above.
There’s no such thing as an IQ gene, but most people (especially on this board) will accept that there is a genetic component to IQ. If you believe that chemicals created by human industry are the only cause of homosexuality, then you should also believe that slavery is the only cause of black crime rates. No one has yet been able to identify a single isolated gene which causes black criminality.
Within the natural world we actually do find behaviors which would be seen as “homosexual” if done by humans. A male dog humping another male dog is one obvious case, which I’ve observed plenty of times. But in the animal world such behavior has no wider ramifications because of limited memory. Even when it comes to heterosexual behavior among animals, the limits of memory make the behavior different from what we normally see among humans.
I found a newly born female kitten on the side of the highway on January 7, 2020. I would normally have gotten her spayed in July of that year, but with all of the CV-19 panic I haven’t taken her to a vet yet. Fortunately, the male cat whom I already had was neutered and so there was no concern about an unexpected pregnancy. I’ve had the chance to watch her moods over the last 3 years. Every 6 months or so she goes into the pattern of trying to grab his attention. Even though he’s neutered, he responds when she starts coming on. After about a week, things subside, and she loses interest. It then seems to be forgotten for a long time.
Humans would not be able to forget things so easily. We would remember and dwell on what had occurred. Should these 2 cats be getting married? Is there a future for them together? The animals don’t think about those things.
Similarly, any instances of homosexual behavior which occur in the wild are easily overlooked. They aren’t recorded through reproductive effects, so they are easy to dismiss. But there’s evidence that such behavior does occur on a low level across the animal kingdom.
It isn’t necessary either to assume some vitally important function for homosexuality in order to allow for it evolving on the edges. A species is like a giant corporation. Within most corporations you will find instances of behavior by employees which is mostly harmless but does nothing to advance the company’s bottom line. As long as enough employees do what needs to be done, that is irrelevant. Similarly, if a small portion of a population occasionally engages in some quirky homosexual behavior, then it won’t disrupt the main activity of the species which continues to propagate. That can continue for a long time without doing anything special for evolution.
Sounds to me like you suffer from Misidentified Anus Syndrome. Trust me, it’ll take a pinky and then some, you’re just not trying.
“A scientist would observe that if there was a gene for being unconditionally homosexual it would have no future, therefore there is no such gene. A scientist would also observe that homosexual behaviour must have some utility or it could not possibly be so persistent.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetic_theories_of_homosexuality
Epigenetics acting upon a complex genome offers a potential partial explanation for perpetuation of an unfit trait at low numbers in the population. Epi-marks can be transmitted from parent to child, but will likely not persist through to subsequent generations, or the can arise from environmental stressors. Consider the latter along with Freud’s observation that many homosexual men have domineering mothers. Could embryonic development in a less than feminine womb cause critical genes to be switched off through physioenvironmentally induced epigenetic modifications?
Another massacre? We are supposed to be at a higher level of development at this time. How about they just pay higher taxes? If they want to be accepted into the civilization that has somehow survived without them for thousands of years, they should literally pay their way into it to offset the burden of moral shifts.